Doudou Zayed v. Kevin Raycraft et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan conditionally granted Doudou Zayed’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court held that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory-detention provision in § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs his detention and concluded that his current detention violated the Fifth Amendment. Respondents were ordered to provide a bond hearing within five business days or immediately release him.

Holdings

1. The court declined to require prudential exhaustion of Petitioner's administrative remedies and alternatively concluded that waiver of exhaustion was appropriate.
2. Section 1226(a), not the mandatory-detention provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs noncitizens who have resided in the United States and were already present in the country when apprehended and arrested.
3. Petitioner's continued detention under the mandatory-detention framework of 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.
4. The ICE Detroit Field Office Director was not the only proper respondent; the court retained the ICE Detroit Field Office Director, the Acting Director of ICE, and the Secretary of Homeland Security as respondents.

Questions Presented

1. Whether prudential exhaustion of administrative remedies should bar or delay Petitioner's § 2241 challenge to his immigration detention.
2. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), rather than 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), authorized Petitioner's detention.
3. Whether Petitioner's detention under the mandatory-detention framework of § 1225(b)(2)(A) violated the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.
4. Whether the ICE Detroit Field Office Director was the only proper respondent in the habeas action.

Disposition

writ_granted